“You would have procreative power, you would have your own offspring, you would create your own worlds”

“We’re going pretty deep into this theology thing,” President Boone [of the Provo MTC] says a bit uncomfortably. When Jesus returns, he says, the New Jerusalem will be located on the Missouri side of suburban Kansas City. “The church has many holdings, property-wise, real estate-wise there,” Boone says. He also confirmed what is arguably the Church’s most unusual teaching of all—the polytheistic doctrine that one day, righteous Mormons will become gods and live with their families forever. As Boone explains, the fifth prophet of the Church taught, “As man now is, God once was. As God now is, man may become.” Boone quotes chapter and verse from the Old and New Testaments to support the claim that Christianity was always intended to be polytheistic, with righteous human beings eventually becoming gods. “In the creation account in Genesis it says, ‘Let us make man in our own image’… and we believe that. I’m not sure about everybody else. When Christ was giving the Sermon on the Mount, he directed them ‘to be perfect, even as their Father in heaven was perfect.’ Well that’s quite a charge. So most Christians would say and most Jews would say and most Muslims would say that we ought to be more God-like in our activities. So where do you draw the line. Is He happy if we’re 5 percent like Him? If we’re 10 percent? Fifty percent? The charge is ‘Be therefore perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect.’ So we take that very literally and that raises the ire of some. They say ‘You’re dragging God down to human level’ but it’s just the opposite.”

Boone assured me that I, like all people, had the potential to become a god. “The fact is, sure. You would have procreative power, you would have your own offspring, you would create your own worlds.”

“Could I create a universe?” I asked incredulously.

“Absolutely.”

The promise of one day becoming a god is seductive.

Kudos to president Boone for admitting to something many official representatives of the LDS Church would squirm to think of publicly affirming so explicitly!

137 Responses to “You would have procreative power, you would have your own offspring, you would create your own worlds”

I’m probably being redundant, but the reality is that we are dealing with two different religious systems. That’s pretty evident in reading the above posts. The comments from the Mormons make perfect sense within their system. Their comments make no sense and in fact have no validity within the traditional orthodox Christian system. The burden of proof as to the authenticity of the Mormon gospel is on Mormons. It’s really an exercise in futility to argue/discuss doctrinal points when the whole thing centers on Joseph Smith. So to me it’s simple. Was Joseph Smith a prophet? Answer that in the negative and the discussion about doctrine is irrelevent (unless of course these doctrinal discussions leads someone to that conclusion). We have the responsibility of discerning the truth from that which is false. For me, this is really easy when it comes to Joseph Smith. I don’t even have to get into progression to godhood. The train stops way before that.

To be clear, I believe the law does help us know a standard of righteousness to which we aspire, but to think that fully keeping it or even an allegedly harsher law—the Celestial Law—is required as a prerequisite for being saved in the fullest since… well that shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the gospel. If we would simply receive Christ in a way that trusts him for a present assurance of eternal life and and the immediate forgiveness of sins, Jesus did all the law-keeping in our place required for our eternal life. Our subsequent sanctification is a product—not a prerequisite—of being justified.

“There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.” (Romans 8:3-4)

Aaron, quite right. The law reflects the holy nature of God, and in turn serves to illuminate the utter sinfulness of man. We are commanded to be perfect but we can never reach that perfection in our own works. Thus the inability of man meets the grace of God.

When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished, saying, “Who then can be saved?” But Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matthew 19:25-26

Chuck, I think the issue is that you underestimate the totality of your sin and mine. The problem with the command to perfection is not God being unjust but us being sinners.

I put out a blog entry here that addresses the issue of grace and works, and makes the case that our works can never save us, or even help to save us and that there is not a shred of Biblical evidence to the contrary. I woujld welcome comments on what I have written.

I am not certain what you are saying Aaron. Are you saying we must obey the law, or it doesn’t matter?

I know I am beating a dead horse, but I just cannot get past James 2:18-26. Very concise and clear. Again, I am not saying that works saves for the work by themselves, but you cannot have faith without your the fruit of that faith being visible by works.

So you may say that it is traditional orthodox Christianity, but even the Jews preached the traditional orthodox Christianity known as the tradition of the Elders. When questioned Matt. 15:2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders?
Jesus said:
Matt. 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

So I am certain we will always be at opposition on this topic as I will not change your mind nor you mine.

As for those who are comparing the likes of David Koresh with prophets of God there is no merit in the comparison. I understand why you want to as an attempt to discredit the prophet.

As for polygamy, does this mean Jacob (or any other biblical prophet with multiple wives) wasn’t a prophet either and he was like David Koresh too?

I state again, just because you don’t believe it, you mock it, or draw your comparisons, doesn’t mean your right. It simply means your view narrow.

James 2 is not nearly as concise and clear as you have been led to believe regarding faith and works. Try reading it again, but read it if you can in context of what James is saying and in context of the Biblical record of justification by faith. What does James 2:10 say? “For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it.” So if you slip up even a little, you mess the whole deal up and no one has kept the law perfectly except…Jesus Christ. Merely eight verses before your rock solid, concise verses James says that anyone who breaks any part of the law breaks all of it. Looking at the text as a whole instead of proof-texting often gives a clearer and more accurate picture.

Not to slide into a side issue, but why is there no merit in the Koresh/Smith comparison? I think that there is quite a lot of similarity between the two. Or are you content to just dismiss it out of hand? A topic for a different day and a different thred, but there have myriad false prophets in the two thousand years since the Cross, and all have claimed to hold the truth and all have perverted the truth of the Gospel.

What makes Smith and Koresh false prophets is not that they had multiple wives, but that they worshipped false gods.

By the way, yes Jacob took multiple wives. Did God command him to do so? Did God command Abraham to take Hagar as a wife in addition to Sarah? Or does the Bible merely record those events? There is a BIG difference.

Aaron, don’t be frustrated, we are saying the same thing. I will try to be brief but still address the topics you bring up.

What we agree on:
To be justified (make free from blame or guilt) we must exercise faith in Jesus Christ and repent of our sins so we may receive the cleansing power of His Atonement.

Once we are reconciled with God (brought into harmony or compatibility with), our good works are the “fruits” of our faith.

Pauline Epistles
To address your comment about taking the other parts of the New Testament seriously. Mormonism addresses these parts like you mention.

Paul had been writing to Church members in several areas who had returned to practicing he law of Moses, believing that strict observance of this law was necessary for salvation. Although the Saints in Rome were strong in the Gospel (Romans 1:8), Paul wrote this epistle to emphasize that justification and salvation come through faith in Christ, not through the works of the law of Moses.

Where the confusion lies is that most people interpret Paul’s writings to mean that we can be justified through faith alone without good works (fruit). But as we agree, good works comes from the faith we have in Christ. In other words, we cannot be saved on faith alone if we continue to be disobedient and commit sin. Even Paul says “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.” (Romans 3:31) The faith we have, establishes the law we live by; thus producing the good works, even obedience to that law.

The issue with the law of Moses is that the Jews corrupted the Law by pushing it beyond it original meaning where they worshiped the law more than they worshiped God. This is why Paul struggled with many of these Saints who were converted, but still wanted to live the law of Moses. But we know that Jesus fulfilled the law of Moses and not needed any longer.

Arthur, there is no merit to the comparison because Joseph Smith saw God the Father and Jesus Christ, face to face. It didn’t simply claim to be a Prophet. His fruits bore witness to the facts. I will leave it at that.

As for the God he worshiped. The God Joseph worshiped was God the Father, even the Father of Jesus Christ. So if you are calling God the Father a false god, then you would be correct in your assumption. I for one believe God the Father to be the only true and living God who sent His son Jesus Christ to save all mankind.

Well, Smith certainly claimed to have seen personages he called God the Father and Jesus Christ, at least in his later, revised versions of the first vision. His claim is dubious at best, and outrageous and heretical at worst. The fruits of Smith’s “ministry” indeed bear witness to his claims: adultery, polygamy, heresy, violence, schism.

People claim to see God all the time, or the Virgin Mary in a grilled cheese sandwich or Elvis in water stains on a wall. The only authoritative source we can turn to when people make such claims is the Bible. When a person claims to speak authoritatively or with “new” revelation, study God’s Word. Titus 1:9 gives us this model for elders: “He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it” Smith and other false prophets throughout the centuries contradict the Word, and as such their teachings must be compared to it and they must be rebuked. When you compare the God of the Bible with the gods that Joseph Smith claimed to follow, you see that they are as different as they could be. At least be honest and recognize that the God of the Bible and the gods of mormonism are different.

Aaron you stated that “God told us to do something we can not do -be perfect”. How is this different from giving Adam and Eve 2 commandments and to obey 1 the other had to be broken. God wants us to figure things out and use our free agency. You know our “Wana Be God Tests”. Why are there so many different Ev churches? Shouldn’t you all have come up with the same path using the Bible? What drives your interpretations and sermons, money coming in the door? Also, if we are so inferior what of Gal 3:29 “and if ye be Christ’s then are ye Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.” Heirs to what? ARTHUR I don’t understand how you can put God and Jesus together when the NT so states they are separate.

“What then is the law of justification? It is simply this: ‘All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations (D. & C. 132:7), in which men must abide to be saved and exalted, must be entered into and performed in righteousness so that the Holy Spirit can justify the candidate for salvation in what has been done. (1 Ne. 16:2; Jac. 2:13-14; Alma 41:15; D. & C. 98; 132:1, 62.) An act that is justified by the Spirit is one that is sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise, or in other words, ratified and approved by the Holy Ghost. This law of justification is the provision the Lord has placed in the gospel to assure that no unrighteous performance will be binding on earth and in heaven, and that no person will add to his position or glory in the hereafter by gaining an unearned blessing.” – Bruce R. McConkie (>>)

Sorry it’s been so long guys, moving then my College got hit by that tornado that ravaged the south on the 5th. Anyways I’d like to address somethings Woenigma said God permitting.

Why are there so many different Ev churches?
Shouldn’t you all have come up with the same path using the Bible?
Please read Romans 14 Paul explains that there will be some differences in our faith, on issues that are non-essential.

What drives your interpretations and sermons, money coming in the door?
The text drives our interpretations, we use all of scripture not simply the verses we like while leaving out others that seem to make our theology weak. Why? because if it’s between me and what God said in His word I can do one of two things, I can think I am better and know more than God, or I can trust His words about Himself and place myself lower than Him, not being a god unto myself.

Also, if we are so inferior what of Gal 3:29 “and if ye be Christ’s then are ye Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.” Heirs to what?
One that text is not speaking to the promise but to the fact that there is neither male nor female, greek nor jew, slave nor free man, but all are one in Christ, if they are in Christ by faith. As to the promise it is the promise of eternal life with God, the Kingdom of Heaven, the Hope of Glory, to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.

I don’t understand how you can put God and Jesus together when the NT so states they are separate.
Amen, Jesus is not God the Father, to say that He is the Father is a classical heresy, Monarchianism, defeated in the second. Therefore we must distinguish what you mean by God, if you mean the being of God, then yes Jesus is God, if you mean the Person, either God the Father or God the Holy Spirit, then no Jesus is not them, for they are separate persons of God. God is one substance, one essence, in three persons.

Aaron, I must admit I have enjoyed this conversation. I am gaining more clarity to your position. While I was focused on finding similarities, it is becoming clear there are more dissimilarities than I originally supposed.

I now understand that you do not believe baptism nor repentance are necessary for salvation as you would link them to the “salvation by works” and being a yoke. So when you say saved by grace alone, it is the literal sense meaning no other requirements… period. This would include if you were to commit sin in any form after “being saved” you have no responsibility for those acts that are contradictory to the laws of God because you are already “saved by grace”. I cannot subscribe to this form of thinking.

I understand your intention by asking me to denounce publicly Elder McConkies statement. However I will no more denounce McConkies statements than you would denounce the Bible. But I see why you find them in contempt, they explain that baptism and repentance are part of the process of justification; and this is as I believe also. So you are right about one thing, since I believe repentance and baptism is a prerequisite of justification, then we do not agree.

Thanks for taking time to explain your position. It has been enlightening. So now that we are clear about where each of us stand, will you enlighten me further? Do all evangelical Christians take that same position? or is there variation in the interpretation of it? I understand there may be insignificant variations such as timing or methods, but I am just trying to understand the position of all evangelicals in general, if there is one.

“ARTHUR I don’t understand how you can put God and Jesus together when the NT so states they are separate.”

What?

John 10:30 I and the Father are one.

John 1: 1-3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Christ is God, THAT is clear from the NT. He is uncreated, flying in the face of mormon dogma that Jesus is a created being. Christ is eternal and the object of worship throughout the NT. You’ll have to do better than mere blanket assertions regarding the nature of Jesus Christ that are unsupported by the Bible.

Progression to godhood is incumbent on man’s works not on God’s grace. As Ev. Christians we are not working to become gods. So our motivation to become like Christ is not to become one of Him. It’s to be one with Him in character. Grace, which is the unmerited favor of God, is extended to us out of God’s mercy. God’s mercy produces faith in us who then believe in the atoning sacrifice of Christ. Faith produces in us good works which is indicative of true repentance. Our good works don’t justify us before God, they justify us before men. Good works are the real proof of our justification before God. This justification is based solely on faith in Jesus. So the Mormon approach makes sense in the context of becoming a god, which we as Ev. Christians reject. Arguing the Mormon position only makes sense in the context of progression to godhood. It doesn’t make sense in a context of the Christian view of the nature of God and man. So Mormons you are absoultely right within your context, which Christians reject as not only heresy but blasphemy.

Those scriptures you use do not necessarily support your view. On the internet is a ‘book’ written by a Muslim called “What Did Jesus Really Say?” In it he discusses John 1:1 and uses the Greek text. (URL is http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch1.2.2.6.html). In it he says that the word used for the second ‘god’ (ie reference to Jesus) can also be interpreted as ‘divine’. He then goes on to show that the same word is used in 2 Cor 4:4 to describe the devil.

Then when you use John 10:30 you then need to explain the great intercessory prayer in John 17:20 -23 My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

A team is ‘one’ even though it is made up of many different people, so this verse can still fit the LDS belief system, which also makes it easier to explain John 17.

Falcon,

Look at it from the LDS perspective. If we are right, then the Evangelical/Traditional Christian system is both heresy and blasphemy. So who is correct? You can insist as much as you like that you are, but I have done a lot of research and prayer and I know that I have found what I believe is right. Impasse.

“theos” is used as a noun in John 1:1, not an adjective. Note how the rest of John 1 uses the term in verses 6, 12, 13, and 18. Also notice how Jesus is distinguished in the Gospel of John from other humans as having a pre-existence.

One would be hard-pressed to make an argument from the Gospel of John that we are of the same fundamental species as God, a tenet central to traditional Mormonism.

In addition, we are told that nothing was made that was not made by Christ. He could not be created, as all things that were created were created by Him. He was present before creation, eternal and eternally co-existent with the Father. All other beings, men, angels, Satan were created afterwards and as such are different in substance and nature from the Father, the Son and Spirit. Interesting that you would turn to a Muslim to refute Christ’s divinity. Try reading James White’s explanation of John ch 1: http://vintage.aomin.org/JOHN1_1.html. Dr. White first addresses the deity of Christ in John 1 and then addresses Jehovah’s Witness abuse of it in more detail, but the basics are the same. I would suggest that Dr. White knows Greek nuance far better than you, or I or this Muslim fellow.

Christ’s intercessory prayer is a reference to adoption (see Gal 4), that through Christ we are adopted into the family of God. To use a crude example, if I adopt a child, that child becomes part of my family but is not genetically related.

This brings us back to the futility of a works based, or even a grace works system. We are not gods in progress, but completely different in nature from God the Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. A human cannot reconcile himself to God because such things are impossible with man, but with God all things are possible. The mormon pursuit of self-worthiness and righteousness in partnership with Christ is futile because of the inherent gulf between a Holy God and sinful men.

Ralph,
I’ve taken a good look at Mormonism and found it to be false. I could give you the top 25 reasons, but why? I’ve read many accounts of dedicated Mormons who have come out of the Sect after years inside. It’s apparent from their testimonies that they’ve come through a spiritual battle. In this battle they’ve rejected the god of Mormonism and received the God of the Bible.

Aaron, you mentioned that being the same species as God is a tenet of Mormonism. I’m not certain if you meant ONLY in Mormonism. So I wanted to share some additional information.

There is an article written by Robert Millet and and Noel Reynolds (http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/bookschapter.php?bookid=45&chapid=534) that talks about 5 early orthodox Christians who not only believed in but taught the deification of man. The article shares the Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology view on deification of man, which supports it. It supports that “whether one accepts or rejects the doctrine of the deification of man, it was clearly a part of mainstream Christian orthodoxy for centuries. Joseph Smith obviously did not make it up. Instead, Latter-day Saints believe, it is an eternal truth restored through modern prophets.”

The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology says, “Finally, it should be noted that deification does not mean absorption into God, since the deified creature remains itself and distinct. It is the whole human being, body and soul, who is transfigured in the Spirit into the likeness of the divine nature, and deification is the goal of every Christian.”

Falcon,
Like you I have read about and heard of and know many people that have converted to the LDS church from other religions (whether Christian or non-Christian) as well as atheism. They have said that joining the LDS church has been the best thing they have ever done. So it still works in reverse. There is no way you can prove to me by others’ words that I am incorrect, just like I cannot prove to you by others’ words that you are incorrect.

You say you have your proof that the LDS church is wrong and because you love the people and wish no one to enter hell in the afterlife you are trying to teach them of your truth. That is fine, I can agree to that and I commend you for it. That’s more than a lot of religious people do (including many LDS). I do the same with my belief. But I believe that I have an answer from God, Himself, that what I believe in is true.

So again, as I said we are at an impass with this – Who is correct? ONLY GOD KNOWS; and we will find out at judgement day.

So again, as I said we are at an impass with this – Who is correct? ONLY GOD KNOWS; and we will find out at judgement day.

We can know who is correct by looking at the evidence. The evidence we find in the Bible verses men or other scripture that do not line up with Gods word. After you get to judgment day and your told depart from me into ever lasting fire, it will be to late for you.

Also from what I read by LDS on this blog along with other blogs and websites, it seems LDS say they believe the Bible, but then turn around and refute every scripture Given and pull a Satan by saying, Did God really say, Does God really Mean, can you trust His word.

I wonder whats the Point of believing if you cannot be sure where you will go after death and if the Bible can even be trusted. Rick b

Chuck5000,
Just something I would like to point out quickly as to why everything from FARMS/FAIR/BYU that mentions ancient sources, in this case the early church fathers, is that they Misquote Irenaeus, attributing the following to him.
“If the Word became a man,
It was so men may become gods.”
The actual quote from the source cited is as follows:
“the Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who did, through His transcendent love, become what we are, that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself.”
Note the difference? The BYU misrepresentation is actually probably a common mistake as the quote appears that way in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, but as it is shown it would have you believe that these are speaking of the Father and not the Incarnate Son, who does indeed have a body, as He is truly God and the true Man, God who in the incarnation took on flesh to pay a debt that humanity owed and only humanity paid. God entering into creation and while retaining His Godhood taking on a Human nature, this is known as the Hyperstaic Union.

“So again, as I said we are at an impass with this – Who is correct? ONLY GOD KNOWS; and we will find out at judgement day.”

That seems like a pretty poor way of doing things, especially since once we get there it is too late. Luckily God didn’t leave us guessing and hoping for the best. He left us His Word and in that Word, the Bible, we find the fullness of the Gospel and God’s work of salvation and redemption. Everything anyone ever has or ever would need to know is in that Word, and it stands forever. The gospel that Joseph Smith peddled is a different gospel entirely, with no power to save and if followed it is a path that leads to destruction. The most unloving thing I could do, after being saved by His Grace, would be to stand idly by while those I once called Brother and Sister stay lost in the errors of mormonism. On the other hand, I know that nothing short of the saving work of God can convince a sinner of his need for Christ, so I will continue to pray for you and all mormons (and all lost people for that matter), that God in His sovereignity will show you the same mercy He has shown me, undeserving though we all are.

Arthur, I read your ‘testimony’ and I know your stance about the LDS church. But just as you did, I also have done my own questioning and research about the LDS church. I had a son that was still born at 34 weeks gestation about 10 years ago. This made me question my beliefs – including did I really believe in God. The questions were not from an “I don’t want to believe in this any more because God killed my son.” But they were more from a perspective of trying to understand God and His plan/will for me and my family. The answers I received re-affirmed to me that this (ie the LDS church) was where God wants me to be and that it is true. I went through many ‘anti-LDS’ sites as well as many anti-Bible sites. So you cannot say I was not thorough and did not look at all the evidence. As I said to Falcon, I commend you for trying to reach out to those who you believe are on the wrong path to set them straight, its something many Christians (including LDS) do not do despite the mandate from God. So I strongly believe, and it has been confirmed to me by God, that I am on the correct path and you are not. Like I said, we are at an impass and only God knows the truth. It is a ‘pretty poor way of doing things’ but its true – we both believe we are correct after all of our research and the ONLY way we will know is at Final Judgement.

Lautensack, So how do you interepret the last part of the statement where it says “that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself” If He did all that “to bring us to be even what He is”, what is He? He is a God and a Saviour, He is a creator of worlds, galaxies and universes, isn’t He? What else? I do not think that Irenaeus has been misiterpreted from the quotes given above. But that’s my opinion.

Rick B, I am sure I am following God and His plan for me and I have faith in Him and am letting Him sort out my eternal existence. Is that not enough for this life?

Ralph,
How hasn’t Irenaeus been misrepresented? They said he wrote words that he did not write. That at the very least is sloppy scholarship for not noting that they were paraphrasing what it was that he truly wrote. To jump from “the Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who did, through His transcendent love, become what we are, that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself.” to “If the Word became a man, it was so men may become gods.” is indeed misrepresentation. Don’t take my word for it read the last sentence of the preface to book five of Against Heresies which is where the quote was taken from.

As for the comment about what does “that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself” mean I do believe that this is speaking of the Humanity of Christ, as Christ is the True God and the True Man. Through Him we can become true men, made Holy by His grace and no longer accursed for sin, for God made Him who knew no sin to become sin that in Him we might be the righteousness of God. The two natures of Jesus are His humanity and Deity, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation. Space will not allow an entire definition of the doctrine of Christ’s Humanity and Divinity, so see the the definition of Chalcedon.

Fair enough. I am comfortable enough with God’s sovereignity to know that I can no more reason you out of mormonism than I can reason someone into Christianity. Having said that, this blog is probably far more useful for those who lurk, read and never post so I will continue to contend earnestly for the faith.

As far as Irenaeus, lautensack is right on with applying what Irenaeus said to 2 Cor 5:21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. It is not that we are becoming gods like Christ is God, but that in the great exchange He became sin on our behalf and imputed His righteousness to us to reconcile us to God (see the preceding verses in 2 Cor 5) Nowhere in the Bible do we see the aim being to become gods ourselves, the common theme is sinful man being reconciled to God through the perfect obedience of Christ. Of course Irenaeus is useful to read but his words are not Scripture.

Arthur- listed below many scriptures where Jesus Christ and God are two personages.
1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
2 John:3 Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love.

Now this next one gives us generations of Gods. AARON note that Jesus makes us kings and priest to God-
Rev 1:6 And Hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever.
Let’s stay in Rev for a few more. Rev. 4:2 John sees “one sat on the throne” WHO IS THIS? Later in 5 someone comes to open the book from the hand of the one on the THRONE. WHO IS THIS? THEY ARE NOT THE SAME PERSON. PLEASE EXPLAIN EV THINKING.
Acts 3:13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate… NOTE ALSO WHAT IS THE SIMLITUDE OF ABRAHAM AND ISAAC WHEN ABRAHAM ALMOST SACRIFICES ISAAC? WHO IS THE FATHER AND WHO IS THE SON? Why such a vivid picture of 2 people. PLEASE EXPLAIN EV.

I have many more but just using common sense what about the following. When Jesus teaches us to pray in the Lords prayer. Why would he call himself Father and not just say pray to me. In the Garden who was he praying to? really himself? On the Cross WHO left him? When he was resurrected why could Mary not touch him – because he had not gone to the Father yet. Another note on this. Paradise and Heaven (where the Father lives is not Paradise) Jesus was with the theif in paradise the day he hung on the cross, but 3 days later he still had not gone where the Father was… hmmmmm please explain EV
If the Bible was so easy to understand there would not be so many Christian churches. And to say this is all what of this scripture. St John 21:25

Uh, I am not sure what you are even arguing against here. No one is saying that the Father and the Son are one personage. No one is saying that Jesus and the Father are not distinct persons. That would be a different heresy called modalism. The Father, the Son and the Spirit are one God in three persons. It is hard to understand but that doesn’t mean it isn’t true. It seems you are arguing against something that isn’t even the issue. The heresy of mormonism regarding the person of Christ is that it a) denies His divinity and b) suggests that He is a created being. Neither of those false beliefs have anything to do with Jesus Christ being distinct from the Father or the Spirit. I am sorry you went to so much trouble to refute an argument that no one is making. I can recommend some great articles on the Trinity if you are interested.

I am not sure what John 21:25 has to do with the issue. Not every action of Jesus is recorded, in fact not every word of Jesus is recorded. The Bible doesn’t record most of His meals, or when He slept or if He asked Peter to pass the salt. Deacdes of His life are left unrecorded. But what the Bible DOES contain is every bit of doctrine, every bit of truth that is needed for salvation. The Gospel of Jesus Christ, complete and sufficient is contained in the Bible, and needs no addition, nor “another testament”.

Arthur, a) the mormons never have denied Jesus divinity. He is a God! but not the God we pray to. So when Jesus tells us how to pray to the Father why do the EV pray to Jesus? b) A created being, that is confusing as well. We believe we all existed before, what is the created being. The only part being created is the body here on this earth, dust to dust and all that. Please explain.
One God in three persons. Who is the “US” in Genesis 1:26? Does God become a person in heaven when the creation goes on? Your right the trinity is confusing. Why? Jesus is God’s son, it’s as simple as that and that’s what the Bible says. Why not believe it?
As for John 21:25 interesting how you make it into when Jesus slept, like only the daily things where left out of the bible. I would say the meat has been left out. What of John 20:30 and many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book;
Do you think this things are not important?
You left out one other point as in the difference between heaven and paradise. Thoughts?

Well that is the thing isn’t it. Just one little letter changes the whole meaning, from Jesus is God to Jesus is “a” god. When mormons speak of Jesus being divine (when they do), they mean He is one of many gods. When Christians speak of Jesus as divine, we mean Him to be one of the three persons of the Trinity, the One God. If the Bible, esp. the OT teaches us anything it is that there is but one God. As far as your question regarding prayer, I would characyerize Christian prayer not as prayer to Jesus, but Triune prayer: praying to the Father, in the Spirit by the name of Jesus Christ.

Re: created being, there is a difference between being created in the same manner as Satan and all human beings, and the Biblical teaching of Christ being uncreated, eternal, without beginning and without end.

“Do you think this (sic) things are not important?” Not important, no. Not essential to salvation, yes. The Bible is the story of God’s redemption of His people. The signs Christ did, His teachings, everything is secondary to His work on the cross. It easy to get caught up in the events leading up to the cross to the point of missing the event of the cross. The Gospel is not the sermon on the mount. It is not healing the sick or the blind. It is about being a propitiation for the sins of His people. The signs testify of who Christ is and what He was about to do.